November 22, 2017 
 
FCC FACT SHEET* 
 
Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative: Electronic Delivery of Cable Communications 
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking – MB Docket Nos. 17-105 and 17-317 
 
Background: The FCC regulates cable operators’ communications with their subscribers and other 
parties under Subpart T of its rules, 47 CFR § 76.1600.  These rules require cable operators to provide 
written information or written notices to their subscribers about various topics.  In June 2017, the 
Commission issued a Declaratory Ruling clarifying that the written information provided to subscribers 
annually pursuant to Section 76.1602(b) may be provided via e-mail, subject to certain consumer 
safeguards.  Commenters in the Commission’s Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative proceeding 
request that the Commission modernize Subpart T by allowing other written notifications from cable 
operators to subscribers to be delivered via e-mail.  Commenters also ask the Commission to allow 
website posting of certain written notices, to update other Subpart T requirements to reflect technological 
and other changes, and to permit cable operators to reply to consumer requests or complaints via e-mail.   
 
Further, Sections 76.64 and 76.66 of the Commission’s rules require broadcasters to provide notice every 
three years, via certified mail to each cable or satellite operator serving its market, of whether it is electing 
to demand mandatory carriage or to withhold carriage pending negotiation for retransmission consent.  
Commenters in the media modernization proceeding have proposed changes to this process.   
 
What the Notice Would Do: 
• Propose to adopt a rule allowing certain written communications from cable operators to 
subscribers required by Subpart T to be delivered to a verified e-mail address with an opt-out 
mechanism enabling customers to continue receiving paper notices.   
• Seek comment on whether to permit cable operators to provide certain written notices to 
subscribers by posting the written material on the cable operator’s website. 
• Seek comment on whether to adopt a rule specifying that subscriber privacy notifications required 
pursuant to Section 631 of the Communications Act may be delivered via e-mail, subject to 
consumer safeguards. 
• Propose to allow cable operators to respond to consumer requests or billing dispute complaints by 
e-mail if the consumer used e-mail to make the request or complaint or if the consumer specifies 
e-mail as the preferred delivery method in the request or complaint. 
• Seek comment on other proposals to update Subpart T in light of technological advances and 
market changes in the cable industry. 
• Seek comment on whether and how to update the requirements that broadcast stations send 
carriage election notices to cable or satellite operators via certified mail.   
                                                          
* This document is being released as part of a "permit-but-disclose" proceeding.  Any presentations or views on the 
subject expressed to the Commission or its staff, including by email, must be filed in MB Docket No 17-317, which 
may be accessed via the Electronic Comment Filing System (https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/).  Before filing, participants 
should familiarize themselves with the Commission’s ex parte rules, including the general prohibition on 
presentations (written and oral) on matters listed on the Sunshine Agenda, which is typically released a week prior to 
the Commission’s meeting.  See 47 CFR § 1.1200 et seq. 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06 
 
Before the 
Federal Communications Commission 
Washington, D.C. 20554 
 
In the Matter of 
 
Electronic Delivery of Cable Communications 
 
Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative 
) 
) 
) 
) 
) 
 
 
MB Docket No. 17-317 
 
MB Docket No. 17-105 
 
NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING* 
 
Adopted:  [] Released:  [] 
 
Comment Date:  [30 days after date of publication in the Federal Register] 
Reply Comment Date:  [45 days after date of publication in the Federal Register] 
 
By the Commission: 
 
I. INTRODUCTION 
1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), we address ways to modernize certain 
notice provisions in Part 76 of the Federal Communications Commission’s rules governing multichannel 
video and cable television service.  First, we seek comment on proposals to modernize the rules in 
Subpart T of Part 76 (Subpart T),1 which sets forth notice requirements applicable to cable operators.  In 
particular, we propose to allow various types of written communications from cable operators to 
subscribers to be delivered electronically, if they are sent to a verified e-mail address that includes a 
mechanism for customers to opt out of e-mail delivery and continue to receive paper notices.  We also 
seek comment on whether to allow subscriber privacy notifications required pursuant to Section 631 of 
the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the Act), to be delivered electronically to a verified e-mail 
address, subject to consumer safeguards.  In addition, we propose to permit cable operators to reply to 
consumer requests or complaints by e-mail in certain circumstances.  Second, we seek comment on 
whether and how to update the requirement in Sections 76.64 and 76.66 of the Commission’s rules that 
requires broadcast television stations to send carriage election notices via certified mail.  With this 
proceeding, we continue our efforts to modernize our regulations and reduce unnecessary requirements 
that can impede competition and innovation in the media marketplace.2   
                                                     
* This document has been circulated for tentative consideration by the Commission at its December 2017 open 
meeting.  The issues referenced in this document and the Commission’s ultimate resolutions of those issues remain 
under consideration and subject to change.  This document does not constitute any official action by the 
Commission.  However, the Chairman has determined that, in the interest of promoting the public’s ability to 
understand the nature and scope of issues under consideration, the public interest would be served by making this 
document publicly available.  The Commission’s ex parte rules apply and presentations are subject to “permit-but-
disclose” ex parte rules.  See, e.g., 47 CFR §§ 1.1206, 1.1200(a).  Participants in this proceeding should familiarize 
themselves with the Commission’s ex parte rules, including the general prohibition on presentations (written and 
oral) on matters listed on the Sunshine Agenda, which is typically released a week prior to the Commission’s 
meeting.  See 47 CFR §§ 1.1200(a), 1.1203. 
1 47 CFR §§ 76.1601-76.1630.   
2 See Commission Launches Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative, Public Notice, 32 FCC Rcd 4406 (MB 
2017) (Modernization Initiative Public Notice) (initiating a review of rules applicable to media entities to eliminate 
or modify regulations that are outdated, unnecessary, or unduly burdensome).   
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
2 
 
II. BACKGROUND 
2. Subpart T Cable Notices.  Subpart T regulates various aspects of cable operators’ 
communications with subscribers as well as with other parties, including television broadcast stations and 
the Commission.3  In 1999, the Commission revised and streamlined the cable television notice, public 
file, and recordkeeping requirements contained throughout Part 76 of the Commission’s rules, and as part 
of this reorganization, it created a new Subpart T for notice requirements.4  Among other requirements, 
Subpart T requires cable operators to communicate specified information about various topics to their 
subscribers in writing, including the following: 
• Deletion or repositioning of broadcast signals (47 CFR § 76.1601):  Requires cable 
operators to provide written notice to subscribers if they are deleting a broadcast 
television station from carriage or repositioning that station. 
• Customer service—general information (47 CFR § 76.1602):  Requires cable operators to 
provide written information to subscribers at the time of installation, at least annually, 
and at any time upon request about: products and services offered; prices and options for 
programming services and conditions of subscription to programming and other services; 
installation and service maintenance policies; instructions on how to use the cable 
service; channel positions of programming carried on the system; billing and complaint 
procedures; assessed fees for rental of navigation devices and single and additional 
CableCARDs; and the fees allocable to the rental of single and additional CableCARDs 
and the rental of operator-supplied navigation devices, if the provider includes equipment 
in the price of a bundled service offering. 
• Customer service—rate and service changes (47 CFR § 76.1603):  Requires cable 
operators to notify customers of any changes in rates, programming services, or channel 
positions as soon as possible in writing; to notify subscribers a minimum of 30 days in 
advance of such changes, if the change is within the control of the cable operator; to 
notify subscribers 30 days in advance of any significant changes in the other information 
required by Section 76.1602; to give 30 days written notice to subscribers before 
implementing any rate or service change, stating the precise amount of any rate change 
and a brief explanation in readily understandable fashion of the cause of the rate change; 
to provide written notice to a subscriber of any increase in the price to be charged for the 
basic service tier or associated equipment at least 30 days before any proposed increase is 
effective (or 60 days if the equipment is provided to the consumer without charge 
pursuant to Section 76.630), including the price to be charged, the date that the new 
charge will be effective, and the name and address of the local franchising authority.5 
• Charges for customer service changes (47 CFR § 76.1604):  Requires cable systems to 
notify all subscribers in writing that they may be subject to a charge for changing service 
tiers more than the specified number of times in any 12-month period, if the cable 
operator establishes a higher charge for changes effected solely by coded entry on a 
computer terminal or by other similarly simple methods. 
                                                     
3 Subpart T refers to “subscribers,” “customers,” and “consumers” interchangeably.  See, e.g., 47 CFR §§ 
76.1602(b), 76.1603(b), 76.1622.  In this NPRM, we use the term “subscribers” for consistency, but it includes both 
“customers” and “consumers” as used in Subpart T. 
4 See 1998 Biennial Regulatory Review - Streamlining of Cable Television Services Part 76 Public File and Notice 
Requirements, Report and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 4653 (1999); Second Report and Order, 16 FCC Rcd 19773 (2001). 
5 To the extent the cable operator is required to provide notice of service and rate changes to subscribers, the 
operator may provide such notice using any reasonable written means at its sole discretion.  47 CFR § 76.1603(e).  
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
3 
 
• Basic tier availability (47 CFR § 76.1618):  Requires a cable operator to provide written 
notification to subscribers of the availability of basic tier service to new subscribers at the 
time of installation, which should include that the basic tier is available, the cost per 
month for basic tier service, and a list of all services included in the basic service tier. 
• Availability of signals (47 CFR § 76.1620):  Requires a cable operator to notify 
subscribers of all broadcast stations carried on the cable system which cannot be viewed 
via cable without a converter box and to offer to sell or lease such a converter box to such 
subscribers, if a cable operator authorizes subscribers to install additional receiver 
connections, but does not provide the subscriber with such connections or with the 
equipment and materials for such connections.6   
• Equipment compatibility offer (47 CFR § 76.1621):  Requires cable system operators that 
use scrambling, encryption, or similar technologies in conjunction with cable system 
terminal devices that may affect subscribers’ reception of signals to offer to supply each 
subscriber with special equipment that will enable the simultaneous reception of multiple 
signals.7 
• Consumer education program on compatibility (47 CFR § 76.1622):  Requires cable 
system operators to provide a consumer education program on compatibility matters to 
their subscribers in writing that includes certain information, such as notice that certain 
models of television receivers and videocassette recorders may not be able to receive all 
of the channels offered by the cable system when connected directly to the system, as 
well as an explanation of the types of channel compatibility problems that could occur if 
the device is connected directly to the system and suggestions to resolve such problems; 
notice that subscribers may not be able to use special features and functions of their 
television receivers and videocassette recorders where service is received through a cable 
system terminal device; and notice that remote control units compatible with cable 
system terminal devices and other customer premises equipment provided to subscribers 
may be obtained from other sources, such as retail outlets, as well as a representative list 
of remote control models that are compatible with deployed customer premises 
equipment.8 
3. In June 2017, the Commission issued a Declaratory Ruling (2017 Declaratory Ruling) 
that interpreted the written communications requirement of one section of Subpart T to be satisfied by 
electronic delivery of written material to subscribers.9  Specifically, the ruling clarified that the “written 
                                                     
6 Such notification must be provided to each new subscriber upon initial installation and annually thereafter.  Id. § 
76.1620.  The notice, which may be included in routine billing statements, must identify the signals that are 
unavailable without an additional connection, the manner for obtaining such additional connection, and instructions 
for installation.  Id. 
7 The offer of special equipment must be made to new subscribers at the time they subscribe and to all subscribers at 
least once each year.  Id. § 76.1621. 
8 This information must be provided to subscribers at the time they first subscribe and at least once a year thereafter.  
Id. § 76.1622.  The rule specifies that this notification requirement may also be satisfied by an annual mailing to all 
subscribers and may be included in one of the system’s regular subscriber billings.  Id. 
9 See National Cable & Telecommunications Association and American Cable Association, Petition for Declaratory 
Ruling, Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd 5269 (2017) (2017 Declaratory Ruling).  The Declaratory Ruling granted a 
petition for declaratory ruling filed by NCTA – The Internet and Television Association (NCTA) and the American 
Cable Association (ACA).  See Petition of National Cable & Telecommunications Association and American Cable 
Association for Declaratory Ruling, MB Docket No. 16-126 (filed March 7, 2016) (requesting clarification that the 
(continued….) 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
4 
 
information” that cable operators provide to their subscribers annually pursuant to Section 76.1602(b) of 
the Commission’s rules may be provided via e-mail to a verified e-mail address if there is a mechanism 
for customers to opt out of e-mail delivery and continue to receive paper notices.10  The Commission 
found that Section 632(b) of the Act grants the Commission authority to establish the means by which 
annual notices may be delivered to subscribers and to specify consumer protections with regard to the 
delivery of the notices.11  It concluded that the statute does not impose any limitations on the 
Commission’s authority under Section 632(b) to specify the means by which cable operators may deliver 
notices to consumers.12  The Commission determined that a verified e-mail address was necessary to 
ensure that the written information is provided – i.e., made available – to subscribers, as is required by 
Section 76.1602(b).13  The Commission also cited policy arguments that it found to be persuasive in 
support of interpreting the “written information” requirement of Section 76.1602(b) to encompass 
electronic distribution to a verified e-mail address, such as the positive environmental aspects of saving 
substantial amounts of paper annually, increased efficiency, and enabling customers to more readily 
access accurate information about their service options.14  The Commission concluded that electronic 
delivery of annual notices would greatly ease the burden of complying with these notification 
requirements for all cable operators, including small cable operators.15   
4. As discussed in more detail below, parties responding to the Commission’s 
Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative ask the Commission to consider permitting electronic 
delivery of information required to be provided by cable operators to subscribers in writing pursuant to 
Subpart T, consistent with the Commission’s findings in the 2017 Declaratory Ruling,16 and to consider 
other changes to the rules in Subpart T.17 
5. Carriage Election Notices.  When the Commission implemented the law establishing the 
must carry/retransmission consent regime,18 it adopted a requirement that each commercial broadcaster 
(Continued from previous page)                                                            
written information that cable operators must provide to their subscribers pursuant to Section 76.1602(b) of the 
Commission’s rules may be provided via electronic distribution). 
10 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5269, para. 1.  
11 Id. at 5273, para. 7.   
12 Id.  In the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992, Congress, in order to “provide 
increased consumer protection,” amended Section 632 of the Act to require the Commission to adopt customer 
service standards for cable operators.  Pub. L. No. 102-385, 106 Stat. 1460 (1992); 47 U.S.C. § 552.  In Section 
632(b), Congress directs the Commission to “establish standards by which cable operators may fulfill their customer 
service requirements” and specifies that “[s]uch standards shall include, at a minimum, requirements governing . . . 
communications between the cable operator and the subscriber (including standards governing bills and refunds).”  
47 U.S.C. § 552(b)(3). 
13 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5274, para. 9. 
14 Id. at 5272-73, para. 6. 
15 Id. at 5273, para. 8. 
16 See infra para. [7].  
17 See infra Section III.A. 
18 “The Communications Act prohibits cable operators and other multichannel video programming distributors from 
retransmitting commercial television, low power television and radio broadcast signals without first obtaining the 
broadcaster’s consent.  This permission is commonly referred to as ‘retransmission consent’ and may involve some 
compensation from the cable company to the broadcaster for the use of the signal.  Alternately, local commercial 
and noncommercial television broadcast stations may require a cable operator that serves the same market as the 
broadcaster to carry its signal.  A demand for carriage is commonly referred to as ‘must-carry.’  If the broadcast 
station asserts its must-carry rights, the broadcaster cannot demand compensation from the cable operator.  While 
(continued….) 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
5 
 
provide periodic notice to cable operators electing either to demand carriage or to withhold carriage 
absent express consent.19  A similar requirement, applying to both commercial and noncommercial 
stations, was adopted as part of the “carry one, carry all” regime for Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) 
carriers.20  In both cases, the election notice must be sent via certified mail once every three years by each 
broadcaster to each cable system and DBS carrier serving the station’s market.  A number of broadcaster 
commenters in the Media Modernization proceeding proposed changes to this process, as set forth 
below.21   
III. DISCUSSION 
A. Modernization of Subpart T Cable Notice Requirements 
1. Electronic Distribution of Notices to Subscribers 
6. We propose to adopt a rule that would allow various types of generic written 
communications from cable operators to subscribers to be delivered electronically, if they are sent to a 
verified e-mail address that includes a mechanism for customers to opt out of e-mail delivery and 
continue to receive paper notices.22  This includes generic written information provided to consumers 
about the deletion or repositioning of broadcast signals (Section 76.1601); general information about 
services offered (Section 76.1602); rate and service changes (Section 76.1603); charges for customer 
service changes (Section 76.1604); basic tier availability (Section 76.1618); availability of signals 
(Section 76.1620); equipment compatibility offer (Section 76.1621); and consumer education program on 
compatibility (Section 76.1622).23  Consistent with the Commission’s clarification in the 2017 
Declaratory Ruling that written information required under Section 76.1602(b) can be sent via e-mail to a 
verified e-mail address with inclusion of an opt-out mechanism, we tentatively conclude to adopt a rule 
reflecting these requirements with respect to Section 76.1602(b) and the other subscriber notices required 
in the rules listed above.24 
7. In comments filed in the Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative docket, some 
industry commenters request that the Commission take steps to ease the burden of complying with the 
(Continued from previous page)                                                            
retransmission consent and must-carry are distinct and function separately, they are related in that commercial 
broadcasters are required to choose once every three years, on a system-by-system basis, whether to obtain carriage 
or continue carriage by choosing between must carry and retransmission consent.”  FCC Media Bureau, Cable 
Carriage of Broadcast Stations, https://www.fcc.gov/media/cable-carriage-broadcast-stations (last visited Oct. 4, 
2017).   
19 47 CFR § 76.64(h) (adopted in Implementation of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act 
of 1992: Broadcast Signal Carriage Issues, MM Docket Nos. 92–259, 90-4, and 92-295, 8 FCC Rcd 2965, 3003 
(1993) (Cable Retrans Order). 
20 47 CFR § 76.66(d) (adopted in Implementation of the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999: Broadcast 
Signal Carriage Issues, CS Docket No. 00-96, 16 FCC Rcd 1918, 1932 (2000)).  “Carry one, carry all” refers to the 
fact that DBS carriers are not required to carry any local broadcast stations in a market, but must carry all of them 
upon request if any are carried (with certain narrow exceptions).  The DBS “mandatory carriage/retransmission 
consent” regime otherwise functions in a manner very similar to the cable “must carry/retransmission consent” 
regime described in note [18], above. 
21 See infra n.[85]. 
22 See Appendix A, Proposed Rules.  By “generic” or “general,” we mean information that applies to subscribers or 
groups of subscribers generally (e.g., those residing in the same zip code; those subscribing to the same service, etc.) 
and is not specific to an individual subscriber.  See 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5274, para. 10, n.40. 
23 47 CFR §§ 76.1601-76.1604, 76.1618, 76.1620-76.1622; supra para. [2]. 
24 See supra para. [3]. 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
6 
 
cable notice requirements, such as by permitting electronic distribution of written notifications to 
subscribers.  NCTA asks the Commission to adopt more efficient, less costly ways to provide required 
notices, and it contends that cable operators should expressly be permitted to correspond with customers 
via electronic means, if the customer has provided the cable operator with an email address or contacted 
the cable operator using such means.25  ACA agrees with NCTA that, at a minimum, the Commission 
“should clarify that the written notice requirement as it pertains to [customer notification] provisions can 
be satisfied via electronic notice.”26  ACA posits that “electronic notification would provide welcomed 
relief to cable operators and other parties from paperwork burdens.”27  According to ACA, modifying 
subscriber notification rules can relieve cable operators from undue burdens and reduce subscriber “notice 
fatigue.”28  Verizon agrees that “electronic delivery should be available for required notices to 
subscribers.”29  Frontier Communications Corporation (Frontier) supports reform of “outdated notice 
requirements that were created before companies had websites and before customers had email.”30 
8. We tentatively conclude that permitting cable operators to deliver the aforementioned 
subscriber notices by e-mail would serve the public interest.  We believe that the policy considerations 
that the Commission found persuasive in the 2017 Declaratory Ruling clarifying that the annual notices 
required under 76.1602(b) may be delivered electronically apply equally with respect to other subscriber 
notices required in Subpart T of the rules,31 and we seek comment on our tentative conclusion that the 
public interest would be served by our proposal.  We note that no party in the media modernization 
proceeding has opposed the cable industry’s request to permit electronic distribution of notices to 
subscribers.  
9. In the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, the Commission concluded that it has authority to 
establish the means by which Subpart T notices may be delivered to subscribers and to specify consumer 
protections with regard to the delivery of the notices.32  As noted above, Section 632(b) of the Act 
provides the Commission with broad authority to “establish standards by which cable operators may 
fulfill their customer service requirements.”33  Moreover, the statute does not impose limitations on the 
Commission’s authority to specify the means by which cable operators may deliver notices to or 
otherwise communicate with consumers (including communications about bills and refunds).34  Because 
the Commission has authority to establish standards governing communications between cable operators 
and subscribers, and e-mail is one such method of communication, we believe permitting cable operators 
to deliver subscriber notices by e-mail is consistent with Section 632(b).   
10. A different statutory standard applies to notices of service and rate changes provided to 
subscribers pursuant to Section 76.1603.  Section 632(c) of the Act states that “[a] cable operator may 
                                                     
25 Comments of NCTA – The Internet and Television Association, at 4-5 (NCTA Comments). 
26 Reply Comments of the American Cable Association, at 9 (ACA Reply).  ACA asks the Commission to launch a 
rulemaking to update outdated subscriber notification requirements.  See Comments of the American Cable 
Association, at 18-26 (ACA Comments). 
27 ACA Reply at 9. 
28 ACA Comments at 19. 
29 Reply Comments of Verizon, at 6 (Verizon Reply). 
30 Reply Comments of Frontier Communications Corp., at 6 (Frontier Reply). 
31 See supra para. [3]. 
32 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5273, para. 7. 
33 47 U.S.C. § 552.  See supra para. [3], n.[12]. 
34 See id. 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
7 
 
provide notice of service and rate changes to subscribers using any reasonable written means at its sole 
discretion.”35  Section 76.1603, which implements Section 632(c), also states that notice of rate or service 
changes can be made by any reasonable written means at the discretion of the cable operator.36  We 
tentatively conclude that “reasonable written means” includes distribution via e-mail to a verified e-mail 
address.  We tentatively find that permitting cable operators to deliver notices about service and rate 
changes via e-mail satisfies the “written means” requirement of Section 632(c).  As we have found 
previously, e-mails, by their very nature, convey information in writing.37  Section 632(c) further requires 
the written means chosen by the cable operator to be “reasonable.”38  For the reasons described below, we 
tentatively find that to be “reasonable,” a cable operator must use a subscriber’s verified email address 
and provide subscribers with an opt-out mechanism.39  We seek comment on these tentative conclusions.   
11. We believe that certain consumer safeguards must be put in place if cable operators are 
permitted to disseminate written notifications to subscribers electronically with respect to Subpart T 
notification rules.  First, we tentatively conclude that cable operators must have verified e-mail contact 
information if they choose to deliver notifications to subscribers via e-mail, and, if no verified e-mail 
contact information is available for a particular subscriber, cable operators must continue to deliver 
notices via paper copies to that subscriber.40  In the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, the Commission determined 
that, for purposes of satisfying the requirements of Section 76.1602(b), each of the following would be 
considered to be a verified e-mail address:  (1) an e-mail address that the subscriber has provided to the 
cable operator (and not vice versa) for purposes of receiving communication, (2) an e-mail address that 
the subscriber regularly uses to communicate with the cable operator, or (3) an e-mail address that has 
been confirmed by the subscriber as an appropriate vehicle for the delivery of notices.41  We see no reason 
to deviate from the criteria identified in the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, and we propose to adopt this as a 
definition of the term “verified e-mail address” as part of our rules.  This definition was proposed by the 
cable industry, and we found that it set acceptable parameters for the e-mail delivery of written material.42  
We seek comment on this proposal and tentative finding.43     
12. Further, we tentatively conclude that cable operators must provide a mechanism for 
subscribers to opt out of e-mail delivery and continue to receive paper notices with respect to Subpart T 
notification rules.  In the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, the Commission determined that to satisfy Section 
76.1602(b), cable operators must include an opt-out telephone number that is clearly and prominently 
presented to subscribers in the body of the originating e-mail that delivers the notices, so that it is readily 
identifiable as an opt-out option, to ensure that customers continue to be provided information in a way 
                                                     
35 See 47 U.S.C. § 552(c); 47 CFR § 76.103.  See also 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5273, n.27; 
Implementation of Cable Act Reform Provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, CS Docket No. 96-85, 14 
FCC Rcd 5296, 5363-64, para. 156 (“[N]otices of rate changes provided to subscribers through written 
announcements on the cable system or in the newspaper will be presumed sufficient.”). 
36 See NCTA Comments at 7-8 (requesting that the Commission clarify that a written notice for purposes of Section 
76.1603 includes an electronic notice); Frontier Reply at 8 (same). 
37 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5273, para. 6. 
38 See 47 U.S.C. § 552(c). 
39 See infra paras. [11-12]. 
40 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5274, para. 9. 
41 Id. 
42 See 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5274, para. 9 (“By requiring the use of a verified email address, we 
will ensure that the . . . notices will have a high probability of being successfully delivered electronically to an email 
address that the customer actually uses, so that the written information is actually provided to the customer.”). 
43 See Appendix A, Proposed Rules, Section 76.1600(b) for the proposed definition. 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
8 
 
that they will actually accept and receive.44  We tentatively find that it is necessary to allow subscribers to 
opt out of e-mail delivery and to provide an opt-out mechanism that is clearly and prominently presented 
in the body of the originating e-mail for purposes of the notice rules in Subpart T, and we seek comment 
on this tentative finding.45  Should we require that cable operators provide a telephone opt-out method as 
a minimum requirement, consistent with the 2017 Declaratory Ruling?  Or, should we also permit cable 
operators to provide the opt-out mechanism via an electronic link that allows subscribers to identify their 
delivery preferences electronically, as an alternative to providing the opt out mechanism via a telephone 
number?46  We recognize that subscribers are accustomed to having electronic opt-out links available in 
commercial e-mails,47 and that, for many Internet-savvy subscribers, an electronic link will be more 
efficient than a telephone number.  However, in the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, the Commission found that 
providing a telephone number “would be the means most universally accessible to customers that prefer 
not to receive their notices electronically,” and it specified this as the minimum requirement.48  Is there 
reason to deviate from that approach for purposes of our rules?  To the extent we adopt safeguards that 
differ from those specified in the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, should we adopt such safeguards also with 
respect to the annual notices required under Section 76.1602(b) of the rules, or is there a reason to treat 
76.1602(b) differently? 
13. In the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, the Commission found that inclusion of a website link to 
the notice itself would be considered reasonable when annual notices are delivered via e-mail, provided 
the link remains active until superseded by a subsequent notice, and would give customers flexibility to 
choose when to review the annual notices.49  We tentatively conclude that this finding should also apply 
with respect to any other Subpart T subscriber notices that the Commission permits cable operators to 
send to subscribers via e-mail, and we seek comment on this tentative finding.  
14. We also seek comment on whether we should permit cable operators to provide to 
subscribers notices of general information at the time of installation and annually thereafter pursuant to 
Section 76.1602 and information on basic tier availability pursuant to Section 76.1618 by posting the 
written material on the cable operator’s website, in lieu of providing such notice to subscribers via U.S. 
mail or electronic delivery to a verified e-mail address.50  NCTA, Frontier, and ACA identify these two 
requirements in particular as suitable for website posting.51  We seek comment on whether it is 
                                                     
44 Id. at 5275, para. 10. 
45 See id.  
46 See Appendix A, Proposed Rules, Section 76.1600(d)(2).  See also 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 
5276, para. 10 (agreeing with commenters that providing a link for customers to identify their delivery preference 
electronically “could also be efficient and convenient for many customers”). 
47 Commercial e-mails must include an opt-out option under the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited 
Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003, 15 U.S.C. § 7701, et seq. (CAN-SPAM Act).  Many commercial e-mails 
satisfy this requirement with an “unsubscribe” link. 
48 See also 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5276, para. 10.  The Commission also noted that, while 
providing an opt-out telephone number is a minimum requirement, “cable operators may choose to offer additional 
choices to their customers that are clearly and prominently presented in the body of the originating e-mail.”  Id. 
49 Id. at 5276, para. 11, n.46.   
50 47 CFR §§ 76.1602, 76.1618.  See supra para. [2].   
51 With respect to initial and annual notices, NCTA notes that this detailed information “appears to be of little utility 
to customers and can become frequently outdated,” and that website posting would enable operators to provide more 
timely information in a less burdensome manner.  NCTA Comments at 5-6.  With respect to notice of the 
availability of the basic service tier, NCTA asserts that most customers would instinctively turn to the cable 
operator’s website for information about programming packages and channel lineups.  Id. at 8-9.  See also ACA 
Comments at 23 (“[T]he Commission should consider modifying its rules to allow cable operators to decide how 
(continued….) 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
9 
 
appropriate for these types of generic notifications to be provided to subscribers via website posting.  We 
seek input on the benefits, both to cable operators and to subscribers, of permitting notices via website 
posting to fulfill these written notice requirements as well as any potential burdens this may pose to 
subscribers.  Would subscribers benefit from having an option that allows them to access written material 
via the cable operator’s website at any time that is convenient to them, as opposed to either paper copies 
delivered to a physical address or e-mail copies delivered to a verified e-mail address?  Would website 
posting lessen the burden on cable operators, and small operators in particular, to communicate this 
information every year to each subscriber on an individual basis, while still fulfilling the objectives of 
Section 632?  
15. On the other hand, would a website posting of initial and annual notices required 
pursuant to Section 76.1602 and information on basic tier availability required pursuant to Section 
76.1618 ensure that subscribers are adequately informed?  The Commission recently observed that “the 
Internet has become a major part of consumers’ daily lives and now represents a widely used medium to 
obtain information.”52  However, in the 2017 Declaratory Ruling, the Commission rejected the request of 
the petitioners in that proceeding to permit electronic delivery of annual notices via other means 
reasonably calculated to reach the individual customer, and instead limited permissible electronic delivery 
to e-mail.53  The Commission explained that allowing other means to deliver annual notices, such as 
placing a website link inside a bill, “could create an undue risk that subscribers will not receive the 
required notices.”54  Can the Commission’s concerns be mitigated by putting some consumer safeguards 
or additional requirements in place?  Further, are there any requirements that the Commission can adopt 
to help ensure that subscribers without Internet access receive the required notices?  For example, if cable 
operators were permitted to include a website link to these notices inside a bill, should we also require 
them to include a telephone number that subscribers can use to request a paper copy of the notices? 
16. To the extent that the Commission does decide to permit website posting of these two 
Subpart T notices, we seek comment on what requirements should be adopted to ensure this information 
can be easily accessed by consumers.  For example, should the Commission require that an electronic link 
to written material posted on a cable operator’s website be clearly labeled “Important Subscriber Notices” 
and be prominently displayed on the initial screen of the cable operator’s website?  This would allow 
subscribers to easily locate the pertinent written material without having to search the website.  As with e-
mail delivery, should any website link containing generic written material include an opt-out mechanism 
that allows subscribers to identify their delivery preferences?  Should the Commission specify that the 
link must allow a subscriber to find the same information that would be included in the paper copies 
delivered to the subscriber’s physical address or delivered by e-mail to a verified e-mail address?  We 
(Continued from previous page)                                                            
best to convey statutorily mandated information about the basic tier to customers.”).  Frontier agrees that cable 
operators should be allowed to share any required annual information by posting the information on its website, 
giving subscribers the opportunity to opt in to e-mail notification.  Frontier Reply at 7.  While acknowledging that, 
for the most part, the notices convey “important information for consumers to have,” ACA questions the benefit of 
delivering the information year after year.  ACA Comments at 20 
52 Amendment of Section 73.624(g) of the Commission’s Rules Regarding Submission of FCC Form 2100, Schedule 
G, Used to Report TV Stations’ Ancillary or Supplementary Services; Amendment of Section 73.3580 of the 
Commission’s Rules Regarding Public Notice of the Filing of Broadcast Applications; Modernization of Media 
Regulation Initiative; Revision of the Public Notice Requirements of Section 73.3580, FCC 17-138, Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking, at 6, para. 8 (rel. Oct. 24, 2017) (seeking comment on whether to update Section 73.3580 of 
the Commission’s rules to provide broadcast licensees with more flexibility as to how they inform the public about 
the filing of certain applications, including whether to allow posting of such notice on an Internet website). 
53 2017 Declaratory Ruling, 32 FCC Rcd at 5276, para. 11. 
54 Id. at 5276, para. 11. 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
10 
 
seek comment on these or any other consumer protections that would be appropriate to impose in 
conjunction with website posting to ensure that consumers effectively receive the required notifications. 
17. Finally, as suggested by NCTA,55 we seek comment on whether we should add a rule in 
Subpart T that specifies that subscriber privacy notifications required pursuant to Section 631 of the Act 
may be delivered electronically to a verified e-mail address, subject to the consumer safeguards discussed 
above.  Section 631 of the Act requires a cable operator to “provide notice in the form of a separate, 
written statement to such subscriber which clearly and conspicuously informs the subscriber of” certain 
privacy protections.56  Should the Commission interpret the term “separate, written statement” in this 
statutory provision to include notices delivered electronically to a verified e-mail address with an opt-out 
mechanism?  If so, should the Commission add a rule to Subpart T codifying this interpretation?  We 
recognize the importance of privacy protections to video subscribers, which are reflected in Section 631.  
Are there concerns underlying the privacy notification requirements that suggest those requirements 
should be treated differently from other subscriber notifications? 
2. Responses to Consumer Requests and Complaints by E-Mail   
18. We propose to allow cable operators to respond to consumer requests or billing dispute 
complaints by e-mail, if the consumer used e-mail to make the request or complaint or if the consumer 
specifies e-mail as the preferred delivery method in the request or complaint, and we seek comment on 
this proposal.57  Sections 76.1614 and 76.1619 of Subpart T require written responses to requests or 
complaints.58  Specifically, Section 76.1614 requires cable operators to respond in writing within 30 days 
to any written request by any person for the identification of the signals carried on its system in 
fulfillment of the must-carry requirements of Section 76.56.59  Section 76.1619 requires cable operators to 
respond to a written complaint from a subscriber within 30 days if there is a billing dispute.60  We seek 
comment on whether there are any other provisions in Subpart T that would be affected by this proposal. 
19. NCTA asks the Commission to clarify that cable providers may use e-mail to respond to 
consumer complaints when the consumer “has provided an e-mail address on the complaint form and has 
not specifically requested a different format.”61  According to NCTA, an electronic submission “implicitly 
and reasonably calls for an electronic response.”62  NCTA also points out that the Commission already 
                                                     
55 See NCTA Comments at 9. 
56 47 U.S.C. § 551(a)(1).  Specifically, Section 631 requires annual notice of “(A) the nature of personally 
identifiable information collected or to be collected with respect to the subscriber and the nature of the use of such 
information; (B) the nature, frequency, and purpose of any disclosure which may be made of such information, 
including an identification of the types of persons to whom the disclosure may be made; (C) the period during which 
such information will be maintained by the cable operator; (D) the times and place at which the subscriber may have 
access to such information in accordance with subsection (d) of this section; and (E) the limitations provided by this 
section with respect to the collection and disclosure of information by a cable operator and the right of the subscriber 
under subsections (f) and (h) of this section to enforce such limitations.”  Id. 
57 See Appendix A, Proposed Rules, Section 76.1600(f).  Our proposal is limited to responses to consumer 
complaints or requests, and does not extend to communications between cable operators and other parties, such as 
broadcast stations.   
58 See 47 CFR §§ 76.1614, 76.1619.   
59 Id. § 76.1614. 
60 Id. § 76.1619. 
61 NCTA Comments at 10. 
62 Id. at 11.   
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
11 
 
permits common carriers and Internet service providers to respond to formal complaints by e-mail.63  
Likewise, Frontier calls on the Commission to allow cable providers to use e-mail to respond to consumer 
complaints when the consumer has provided an e-mail address on the complaint form or if the provider 
has an e-mail address on record.64  Frontier contends that this would “cut down on unnecessary paper 
waste and postage and remove unnecessary costs.”65   
20. We believe that permitting cable operators to respond electronically using the same 
method as the consumer or the method chosen by the consumer gives both parties the opportunity to 
communicate via their method of choice and will allow cable operators to respond more efficiently to 
requests and complaints.  We seek comment on this proposal.   
3. Other Subpart T Requirements   
21. Section 76.1621 (Equipment Compatibility Offer).66  We propose to eliminate Section 
76.1621, which requires cable operators to offer and provide upon request to subscribers “special 
equipment that will enable the simultaneous reception of multiple signals.”67  We seek comment on 
whether the requirements in Section 76.1621 can be eliminated consistent with Section 624a of the Act.68  
NCTA argues the Commission should eliminate this requirement because it is a “relic[] of long-outdated 
technologies and policies.”69  When the Commission adopted the requirement for cable operators to offer 
subscribers special equipment with multiple tuners, it was intended to address “cases where a set-top 
device is used to receive service, [where] subscribers may not be able to use special features and functions 
of their TV receivers, including functions that allow the subscriber to:—View a program on one channel 
while simultaneously recording a program on another channel;—Record two or more consecutive 
programs that appear on different channels; and—Use advanced picture generation and display features 
such as ‘Picture-in-Picture,’ channel review and other functions that necessitate channel selection by the 
consumer device.”70  Today, consumers widely use digital video recorders (DVRs), rather than VCRs or 
                                                     
63 Id. at 10-11 (citing 47 CFR § 1.735(f) (permitting answers to formal complaints against common carriers to be 
delivered by email); and § 8.13(c)(1) (permitting the same for formal complaints regarding open Internet rules)).  
NCTA also notes that this would be consistent with prior guidance from the Consumer and Governmental Affairs 
Bureau allowing providers to submit responses to informal complaints against common carriers via e-mail.  Id. at 
11, n.30. 
64 Frontier Reply at 15. 
65 Id.  Frontier also notes that letter or e-mail communication is frequently made in addition to communication via 
other means, including by phone for “the most pressing and important complaints.”  Id. at 15-16. 
66 ACA and NCTA request that the Commission delete Section 76.1630 of the Commission’s rules, which requires 
cable operators and other multichannel video programming distributors (MVPDs) to provide subscribers with 
notices about the digital transition in monthly bills or bill notices received by subscribers beginning April 1, 2009 
and concluding on June 30, 2009.  See 47 CFR § 76.1630; ACA Comments at 26; NCTA Comments at 9.  We plan 
to address this in a subsequent order in the Modernization of Media Regulation Initiative proceeding.  NCTA and 
Frontier also request that the Commission eliminate or revise the requirements for cable operators to provide 
subscribers with notice of certain rate changes in Sections 76.1603 and 76.1604 of the Commission’s rules.  See 
NCTA Comments at 6-8; Frontier Reply at 8-9.  We plan to address these issues in a subsequent proceeding. 
67 See 47 CFR § 76.1621; supra para. [2].   
68 See 47 U.S.C. § 544a(c)(2).  Section 624A specifies that the Commission “shall periodically review and, if 
necessary, modify the regulations issued pursuant to this section in light of any actions taken in response to such 
regulations and to reflect improvements and changes in cable systems, television receivers, video cassette recorders, 
and similar technology.”  See id. § 544a(d). 
69 NCTA Comments at 9.   
70 See Implementation of Section 17 of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992; 
Compatibility Between Cable Systems and Consumer Electronics Equipment, First Report and Order, 9 FCC Rcd 
(continued….) 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
12 
 
television receivers, for recording features, and “picture-in-picture” features on television receivers are 
not prevalent.  Given today’s digital technologies, we tentatively conclude that it is no longer necessary to 
promote the “special equipment that will enable the simultaneous reception of multiple signals” referred 
to in the rules, and we seek comment on this tentative conclusion. 
22. Section 76.1622 (Consumer Education Programs on Compatibility).71  We seek comment 
on how to appropriately update references to technology in Section 76.1622 of the Commission’s rules, 
which requires cable operators to provide a consumer education program on equipment and signal 
compatibility matters to their subscribers in writing upon initial subscription and annually thereafter.72  
Among other types of technology, the rule refers to the compatibility of “videocassette recorders.”73  
Frontier asks the Commission to update Section 76.1622, noting that a requirement to educate consumers 
on the interoperability of videocassette recorders no longer makes sense.74  ACA emphasizes that 
“[c]oncerns about TV receiver and VCR compatibility are, quite simply, no longer relevant to today’s 
consumer.”75  Although we note that videocassette recorders are not yet entirely obsolete,76 we seek 
comment on how we can best modernize references to technology in Section 76.1622.77  We also seek 
comment on whether there are any parts of the rule that are no longer necessary given changes in 
technology and, therefore, should be eliminated.78  We seek comment on whether the requirements in 
Section 76.1622 can be modified consistent with the Section 624a of the Act, and, if so, how.79     
(Continued from previous page)                                                            
1981, 1992, para. 64 (1994).  See also 47 U.S.C. § 544a(c)(2); Implementation of Section 17 of the Cable Television 
Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992; Compatibility Between Cable Systems and Consumer 
Electronics Equipment, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 11 FCC Rcd 4121 (1996). 
71 See supra para. [2] for a detailed description of the requirements in this rule. 
72 47 CFR § 76.1622. 
73 See id. 
74 Frontier Reply at 7-8.   
75 ACA Comments at 25. 
76 See SNL Kagan, U.S. Home Video Retail Industry, 2017-2027 (2017) (showing that 4.1 million U.S. households 
have a VCR).  
77 ACA asserts that Section 624A of the Act references outdated technology, specifically requiring the Commission 
to prescribe regulations with respect to the compatibility of “videocassette recorders.”  ACA Comments at 23-24; 47 
U.S.C. § 544a(c)(2).  However, as ACA notes, the statute also directs the Commission to periodically review and, if 
necessary, modify its regulations with regard to consumer education about equipment compatibility “to reflect 
improvements and changes in cable systems, television receivers, video cassette recorders, and similar technology.”  
See 47 U.S.C. § 544a(d); ACA Comments at 24, n.93.   
78 See NCTA Comments at 9 (arguing that the Commission should eliminate Section 76.1622 because it is a “relic[] 
of long-outdated technologies and policies” and “addresses equipment that no longer is routinely used by 
consumers”).  Section 624A directs the Commission to “include such regulations as are necessary” to notify 
subscribers of certain consumer electronics equipment compatibility issues.  See 47 U.S.C. § 544a(c)(2) (emphasis 
added). 
79 See 47 U.S.C. § 544a(c)(2).  Section 544a(c)(2) states that “[t]he regulations prescribed by the Commission . . . 
shall include such regulations as are necessary . . . to require cable operators offering channels whose reception 
requires a converter box. . . (i) to notify subscribers that they may be unable to benefit from the special functions of 
their television receivers and video cassette recorders, including functions that permit subscribers . . . to watch a 
program on one channel while simultaneously using a video cassette recorder to tape a program on another channel; 
. . .to use a video cassette recorder to tape two consecutive programs that appear on different channels; and . . .to use 
advanced television picture generation and display features; and. . . (ii) to the extent technically and economically 
feasible, to offer subscribers the option of having all other channels delivered directly to the subscribers’ television 
receivers or video cassette recorders without passing through the converter box.”  In addition, the statute requires the 
(continued….) 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
13 
 
23. Further, we seek comment on whether the Commission should consider any other 
changes to Section 76.1622, such as scaling back the requirement to provide these types of notices 
annually.  ACA asks the Commission to eliminate those parts of the rule that are not mandated by statute, 
such as the requirement to provide this information to subscribers at the time of subscription and then 
annually thereafter, and to give cable operators greater flexibility in determining when and how to notify 
subscribers about equipment compatibility issues.80  ACA argues that the redundancy of annual notices 
“is no longer necessary, especially now that technology has moved far beyond what was considered 
cutting edge at the time the statute was enacted, and the equipment compatibility problems the 
requirement was designed to solve are no longer pervasive.”81  We seek comment on whether the 
Commission should grant cable operators more flexibility with respect to these notices, as suggested by 
ACA.  
B. Carriage Election Notices 
24. We seek comment on whether and how to revise Sections 76.64(h) and 76.66(d) of our 
rules to permit broadcasters to use alternative means of notifying MVPDs about their carriage elections.   
Currently, the rules direct each broadcaster to provide notice every three years, via certified mail, to each 
cable system or DBS carrier serving its market regarding whether it is electing to demand carriage (“must 
carry” or “mandatory carriage”), or to withhold carriage pending negotiation (“retransmission consent”).82  
The DBS rule also states that the certified mail letter be “return receipt requested.”83  The Commission 
“believe[d] that certified mail, return receipt requested is the preferred method to ensure that broadcast 
stations are able to demonstrate that they submitted their elections by the required deadline, and that they 
were received by the satellite carrier.”84  A number of commenters have proposed changes to this 
process.85  
25. We seek comment on whether there are alternative means of serving triennial election 
notices that would satisfy the needs of broadcasters and MVPDs, such as by express delivery service or e-
mail.  Nexstar, among others, suggested that notices could be delivered via e-mail, and AT&T proposed 
allowing broadcasters to use express delivery services instead of certified US mail.86  How would these or 
(Continued from previous page)                                                            
regulations to “require a cable operator who offers subscribers the option of renting a remote control unit . . .to 
notify subscribers that they may purchase a commercially available remote control device from any source that sells 
such devices rather than renting it from the cable operator; and. . .to specify the types of remote control units that are 
compatible with the converter box supplied by the cable operator.”  Id. § 544a(c)(2)(B) and (E). 
80 ACA Comments at 23-25.    
81 Id. at 25. 
82 See supra para. [5]. 
83 47 CFR § 76.66(d)(1)(ii). 
84 Implementation of the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999: Broadcast Signal Carriage Issues, Order 
on Reconsideration, CS Docket No. 00-96, 16 FCC Rcd 16544, 16576 (2001). 
85 See Comments of the National Association of Broadcasters, at 22-23 (NAB Comments); Comments of CBS 
Corporation, The Walt Disney Company, 21st Century Fox, Inc., and Univision Communications Inc., at 10-12 
(CBS, Disney, Fox, and Univision Comments); Comments of Nexstar Broadcasting, Inc., at 16-17 (Nexstar 
Comments); Comments of America’s Public Television Stations et al., at 15 (APTS Comments); Comments of 
Meredith Corporation, at 2; Reply Comments of the ABC Television Affiliates Association, CBS Television 
Network Affiliates Association, and FBC Television Affiliates Association, at 10-11; Joint Reply Comments of the 
Named State Broadcasters Associations, at 7-8; Reply Comments of AT&T, at 5-6 (AT&T Reply).  Although some 
of these commenters proposed even broader changes to the must carry/retransmission consent system, in this docket 
we are focused exclusively on notice issues.    
86 Nexstar Comments at 16-17; AT&T Reply at 5-6. 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
14 
 
other approaches work in practice?  As discussed above, we have in another context allowed delivery of 
certain customer notices to a “verified” email address, noting that such a notice “will have a high 
probability of being successfully delivered electronically to an email address that the customer actually 
uses, so that the written information is actually provided to the customer.”87  We seek comment on 
whether this approach would be sufficient in the context of carriage election notices, where significant 
legal and financial consequences arise from the failure to make a timely election notice.88  Is there an 
electronic equivalent to certified mail?  Would the use of express delivery services, as proposed by 
AT&T, meaningfully reduce burdens on broadcasters?  More generally, can we modernize our rules in a 
way that would minimize the burden on broadcasters, ensure that MVPDs receive the elections in a timely 
way, and still provide a mechanism by which broadcasters can demonstrate that they met the election 
deadline with respect to specific cable operators and DBS carriers? 
26. Some commenters request that we eliminate the requirement to send election notices to 
MVPDs by certified mail, and replace it with a mechanism for providing notice of carriage election 
online.89  For example, in their joint filing, CBS, Disney, and Univision argue that “[t]he system-by-
system election requirement creates inefficiencies, both for broadcasters and cable operators,” 
incentivizes broadcasters to send duplicative notices, and is time-consuming and costly.90  They contend 
that allowing stations to provide notice of elections online “not only would make it easier for broadcasters 
and cable operators to keep track of elections but also would be consistent with rules applicable in other 
contexts and in line with the Commission’s recent shift toward Internet-based solutions.”91  We seek 
comment on the pros and cons of this approach.  In particular, what are the specific benefits to and 
burdens for both broadcasters and MVPDs of such an approach?  Further, what rule changes would the 
Commission need to make to effectuate online notice of elections?  For example, should all broadcasters 
be required to make carriage elections online or would this be one of their options in addition to the 
existing mechanism?  Under an online election approach, how would broadcasters differentiate their 
elections to the extent they wish to make different elections vis-à-vis different MVPDs?  Finally, would 
these online carriage elections be placed in the broadcasters’ online public file or on another (existing or 
new) website that is publicly accessible?   
IV. PROCEDURAL MATTERS 
A. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
27. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),92 the 
Commission has prepared an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) relating to this NPRM.  The 
IRFA is set forth in Appendix B. 
                                                     
87 See supra n.[42] and accompanying text. 
88 A failure to deliver a timely carriage election notice to a cable operator means that station defaults to must carry 
with respect to that operator, and loses the ability to negotiate for compensation for carriage of the station during 
that three-year election cycle.  47 CFR §§ 76.64(f)(3); see also ACA Reply at 13 (arguing that continued reliance on 
certified mail is essential).  On the DBS side, a failure to deliver a timely carriage election notice has the opposite 
effect, meaning the station defaults to retransmission consent and loses the ability to demand carriage during that 
three-year election cycle.  47 CFR § 76.66(d)(1)(v); see also APTS Comments at 14-15. 
89 See, e.g., NAB Comments at 22-23; CBS, Disney, Fox, and Univision Comments at 11-12. 
90 CBS, Disney, Fox, and Univision Comments at 11. 
91 Id. at 11-12.  But see AT&T Reply at 4-5 (arguing that this approach does not minimize burdens – it simply shifts 
them). 
92 See 5 U.S.C. § 603.  The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. § 601 et seq., has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Pub. L. No. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).  The SBREFA 
was enacted as Title II of the Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996 (CWAAA).  
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
15 
 
B. Initial Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis 
28. This document may result in new or revised information collection requirements subject 
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. §§ 3501 through 3520).  If the 
Commission adopts any new or revised information collection requirement, the Commission will publish 
a notice in the Federal Register inviting the public to comment on the requirement, as required by the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. §§ 3501-3520).  In addition, pursuant 
to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. § 3506(c)(4), 
the Commission seeks specific comment on how it might “further reduce the information collection 
burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees.” 
C. Ex Parte Rules 
29. Permit-But-Disclose.  This proceeding shall be treated as a “permit-but-disclose” 
proceeding in accordance with the Commission’s ex parte rules.93  Persons making ex parte presentations 
must file a copy of any written presentation or a memorandum summarizing any oral presentation within 
two business days after the presentation (unless a different deadline applicable to the Sunshine period 
applies).  Persons making oral ex parte presentations are reminded that memoranda summarizing the 
presentation must (1) list all persons attending or otherwise participating in the meeting at which the ex 
parte presentation was made, and (2) summarize all data presented and arguments made during the 
presentation.  If the presentation consisted in whole or in part of the presentation of data or arguments 
already reflected in the presenter’s written comments, memoranda, or other filings in the proceeding, the 
presenter may provide citations to such data or arguments in his or her prior comments, memoranda, or 
other filings (specifying the relevant page and/or paragraph numbers where such data or arguments can be 
found) in lieu of summarizing them in the memorandum.  Documents shown or given to Commission 
staff during ex parte meetings are deemed to be written ex parte presentations and must be filed 
consistent with rule 1.1206(b).  In proceedings governed by rule 1.49(f) or for which the Commission has 
made available a method of electronic filing, written ex parte presentations and memoranda summarizing 
oral ex parte presentations, and all attachments thereto, must be filed through the electronic comment 
filing system available for that proceeding, and must be filed in their native format (e.g., .doc, .xml, .ppt, 
searchable .pdf).  Participants in this proceeding should familiarize themselves with the Commission’s ex 
parte rules. 
D. Filing Requirements 
30. Comments and Replies.  Pursuant to sections 1.415 and 1.419 of the Commission’s rules, 
47 CFR §§ 1.415, 1.419, interested parties may file comments and reply comments on or before the dates 
indicated on the first page of this document.  Comments may be filed using the Commission’s Electronic 
Comment Filing System (ECFS).  See Electronic Filing of Documents in Rulemaking Proceedings, 63 FR 
24121 (1998). 
• Electronic Filers:  Comments may be filed electronically using the Internet by accessing the 
ECFS:  http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. 
• Paper Filers:  Parties who choose to file by paper must file an original and one copy of each 
filing.  If more than one docket or rulemaking number appears in the caption of this 
proceeding, filers must submit two additional copies for each additional docket or rulemaking 
number. 
Filings can be sent by hand or messenger delivery, by commercial overnight courier, or by 
first-class or overnight U.S. Postal Service mail.  All filings must be addressed to the 
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the Secretary, Federal Communications Commission. 
                                                     
93 47 CFR §§ 1.1200 et seq. 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
16 
 
• All hand-delivered or messenger-delivered paper filings for the Commission’s Secretary must 
be delivered to FCC Headquarters at 445 12th Street, SW, TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554.  
The filing hours are 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.  All hand deliveries must be held together with 
rubber bands or fasteners.  Any envelopes and boxes must be disposed of before entering the 
building.   
• Commercial overnight mail (other than U.S. Postal Service Express Mail and Priority Mail) 
must be sent to 9050 Junction Drive, Annapolis Junction, MD 20701. 
• U.S. Postal Service first-class, Express, and Priority mail must be addressed to 445 12th 
Street, SW, Washington, DC 20554. 
31. Availability of Documents.  Comments, reply comments, and ex parte submissions will 
be available for public inspection during regular business hours in the FCC Reference Center, Federal 
Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, CY-A257, Washington, DC 20554.  These 
documents will also be available via ECFS.  Documents will be available electronically in ASCII, 
Microsoft Word, and/or Adobe Acrobat. 
32. People with Disabilities.  To request materials in accessible formats for people with 
disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an e-mail to fcc504@fcc.gov or call 
the FCC’s Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 418-0530 (voice), (202) 418-0432 
(TTY).   
E. Additional Information 
33. For additional information on this proceeding, contact Maria Mullarkey, 
Maria.Mullarkey@fcc.gov, or Katie Costello, Katie.Costello@fcc.gov, of the Policy Division, Media 
Bureau, (202) 418-2120. 
V. ORDERING CLAUSES 
34. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, pursuant to the authority found in sections 1, 4(i), 
4(j), 325, 624A, 631, and 632 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 154(i), 
154(j), 325, 544a, 551, and 552 this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking IS ADOPTED. 
35. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commission’s Consumer and Governmental 
Affairs Bureau, Reference Information Center, SHALL SEND a copy of this Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, including the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of 
the Small Business Administration. 
      FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION 
 
 
 
 
      Marlene H. Dortch 
      Secretary 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06 
17 
 
APPENDIX A 
 
Proposed Rules 
 
Part 76 of the Commission’s rules is amended as follows: 
 
PART 76 – MULTICHANNEL VIDEO AND CABLE TELEVISION SERVICE 
 
1.  The authority for Part 76 continues to read as follows: 
AUTHORITY: 47 U.S.C. 151, 152, 153, 154, 301, 302, 302a, 303, 303a, 307, 308, 309, 312, 315, 317, 
325, 338, 339, 340, 341, 503, 521, 522, 531, 532, 534, 535, 536, 537, 543, 544, 544a, 545, 548, 549, 552, 
554, 556, 558, 560, 561, 571, 572, 573. 
 
2.  Add new Section 76.1600 to read as follows: 
§ 76.1600   Electronic delivery of notices. 
(a) Written information, notices, advisements or offers that are generic in nature and provided in 
writing by cable operators to subscribers or customers pursuant to this Subpart T, may be delivered 
electronically by e-mail if the cable operator: 
(1) sends the written material to the subscriber’s verified e-mail address, and  
(2) provides a mechanism for the subscriber to opt out of e-mail delivery and continue to receive 
paper copies of the written material.  
(b) For purposes of this section, a verified e-mail address is defined as:  
(1) an e-mail address that the subscriber has provided to the cable operator (and not vice versa) for 
purposes of receiving communication,  
(2) an e-mail address that the subscriber regularly uses to communicate with the cable operator, or  
(3) an e-mail address that has been confirmed by the subscriber as an appropriate vehicle for the 
delivery of notices. 
(c)  The term “generic” means information that applies to subscribers or groups of subscribers 
generally (e.g., those residing in the same zip code; those subscribing to the same service, etc.) and is not 
specific to an individual subscriber. 
(d) Cable operators must include, in the body of the originating e-mail that delivers the written 
material, a mechanism for the subscriber to opt out of e-mail delivery that is clearly and prominently 
presented to subscribers so that it is readily identifiable as an opt-out mechanism.  The mechanism may be 
either: 
(1) an opt-out telephone number, or  
(2) an electronic link that allows subscribers to identify their delivery preferences electronically. 
 (e) If the conditions for electronic delivery in subsections (a) through (c) are not met, or if a 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
18 
 
subscriber opts out of electronic delivery, the written material must be delivered by paper copy to the 
subscriber’s physical address. 
(f) In this Subpart T, any required written response to a subscriber or customer may be delivered by 
e-mail, if the consumer used e-mail to make the request or complaint or if the consumer specifies e-mail 
as the preferred delivery method in the request or complaint. 
(g) This section applies only to written information, notices, advisements, offers or responses 
provided to subscribers or customers and does not affect communications between cable operators and 
other parties addressed in this Subpart T. 
3. Delete § 76.1621.
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06 
19 
 
APPENDIX B 
 
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
 
1. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA),1 the Commission 
has prepared this present Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) concerning the possible 
significant economic impact on small entities by the policies and rules proposed in the Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NPRM).  Written public comments are requested on this IRFA.  Comments must be 
identified as responses to the IRFA and must be filed by the deadlines for comments provided on the first 
page of the NPRM.  The Commission will send a copy of the NPRM, including this IRFA, to the Chief 
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration (SBA).2  In addition, the NPRM and IRFA 
(or summaries thereof) will be published in the Federal Register.3 
A. Need for, and Objectives of, the Proposed Rules 
2. This NPRM addresses ways to modernize certain notice provisions in Part 76 of the 
Federal Communications Commission’s rules governing multichannel video and cable television service.  
First, the NPRM seeks comment on proposals to modernize the rules in Subpart T of Part 76 (Subpart T),4 
which sets forth notice requirements applicable to cable operators.  In particular, the NPRM proposes to 
allow various types of written communications from cable operators to subscribers to be delivered 
electronically, if they are sent to a verified e-mail address that includes a mechanism for customers to opt 
out of e-mail delivery and continue to receive paper notices.  The NPRM also seeks comment on whether 
to allow subscriber privacy notifications required pursuant to Section 631 of the Communications Act of 
1934, as amended (the Act), to be delivered electronically to a verified e-mail address, subject to 
consumer safeguards.  In addition, the NPRM proposes to permit cable operators to reply to consumer 
requests or complaints by e-mail in certain circumstances.  Second, the NPRM seeks comment on 
whether and how to update the requirement in Sections 76.64 and 76.66 of the Commission’s rules that 
requires broadcast television stations to send carriage election notices via certified mail. 
B. Legal Basis 
3. The proposed action is authorized pursuant to sections 1, 4(i), 4(j), 325, 624A, 631, and 
632 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, 47 U.S.C. §§ 151, 154(i), 154(j), 325, 544a, 551, 
and 552. 
C. Description and Estimate of the Number of Small Entities To Which the Proposed 
Rules Will Apply 
4. The RFA directs agencies to provide a description of, and where feasible, an estimate of the 
number of small entities that may be affected by the proposed rules, if adopted.5  The RFA generally 
defines the term “small entity” as having the same meaning as the terms “small business,” “small 
organization,” and “small governmental jurisdiction.”6  In addition, the term “small business” has the 
                                                     
1 See 5 U.S.C. § 603.  The RFA, see 5 U.S.C. §§ 601-612, has been amended by the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), Pub. L. No. 104-121, Title II, 110 Stat. 857 (1996).  The SBREFA 
was enacted as Title II of the Contract With America Advancement Act of 1996 (CWAAA). 
2 See 5 U.S.C. § 603(a). 
3 See id. 
4 47 CFR §§ 76.1601-76.1630.   
5 5 U.S.C. § 603(b)(3). 
6 Id. § 601(6). 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
20 
 
same meaning as the term “small business concern” under the Small Business Act.7  A small business 
concern is one which:  (1) is independently owned and operated; (2) is not dominant in its field of 
operation; and (3) satisfies any additional criteria established by the SBA.8  Below, we provide a 
description of such small entities, as well as an estimate of the number of such small entities, where 
feasible. 
5. Cable Companies and Systems (Rate Regulation Standard).  The Commission has also 
developed its own small business size standards, for the purpose of cable rate regulation.  Under the 
Commission’s rules, a “small cable company” is one serving 400,000 or fewer subscribers, nationwide.9  
Industry data indicate that, of 1,076 cable operators nationwide, all but 11 are small under this size 
standard.10  In addition, under the Commission’s rules, a “small system” is a cable system serving 15,000 
or fewer subscribers.11  Industry data indicate that, of 6,635 systems nationwide, 5,802 systems have 
under 10,000 subscribers, and an additional 302 systems have 10,000-19,999 subscribers.12  Thus, under 
this second size standard, the Commission believes that most cable systems are small. 
6. Cable System Operators.  The Act also contains a size standard for small cable system 
operators, which is “a cable operator that, directly or through an affiliate, serves in the aggregate fewer 
than 1 percent of all subscribers in the United States and is not affiliated with any entity or entities whose 
gross annual revenues in the aggregate exceed $250,000,000.”13  The Commission has determined that an 
operator serving fewer than 677,000 subscribers shall be deemed a small operator, if its annual revenues, 
when combined with the total annual revenues of all its affiliates, do not exceed $250 million in the 
aggregate.14  Industry data indicate that, of 1,076 cable operators nationwide, all but 10 are small under 
this size standard.15  We note that the Commission neither requests nor collects information on whether 
cable system operators are affiliated with entities whose gross annual revenues exceed $250 million,16 and 
                                                     
7 Id. § 601(3) (incorporating by reference the definition of “small-business concern” in 15 U.S.C. § 632).  Pursuant 
to 5 U.S.C. § 601(3), the statutory definition of a small business applies “unless an agency, after consultation with 
the Office of Advocacy of the Small Business Administration and after opportunity for public comment, establishes 
one or more definitions of such term which are appropriate to the activities of the agency and publishes such 
definition(s) in the Federal Register.”  5 U.S.C. § 601(3). 
8 15 U.S.C. § 632. 
9  47 CFR § 76.901(e).  The Commission determined that this size standard equates approximately to a size standard 
of $100 million or less in annual revenues.  Implementation of Sections of the 1992 Cable Act: Rate Regulation, 
Sixth Report and Order and Eleventh Order on Reconsideration, 10 FCC Rcd 7393, 7408 (1995). 
10  These data are derived from:  R.R. Bowker, Broadcasting & Cable Yearbook 2006, “Top 25 Cable/Satellite 
Operators,” pages A-8 & C-2 (data current as of June 30, 2005); Warren Communications News, Television & 
Cable Factbook 2006, “Ownership of Cable Systems in the United States,” pages D-1805 to D-1857. 
11  47 CFR § 76.901(c).   
12  Warren Communications News, Television & Cable Factbook 2008, “U.S. Cable Systems by Subscriber Size,” 
page F-2 (data current as of Oct. 2007).  The data do not include 851 systems for which classifying data were not 
available. 
13 47 U.S.C. § 543(m)(2); see also 47 CFR § 76.901(f) & nn.1–3. 
14 47 CFR § 76.901(f); see FCC Announces New Subscriber Count for the Definition of Small Cable Operator, 
Public Notice, 16 FCC Rcd 2225 (Cable Services Bureau 2001). 
15 These data are derived from R.R. BOWKER, BROADCASTING & CABLE YEARBOOK 2006, “Top 25 Cable/Satellite 
Operators,” pages A-8 & C-2 (data current as of June 30, 2005); WARREN COMMUNICATIONS NEWS, TELEVISION & 
CABLE FACTBOOK 2006, “Ownership of Cable Systems in the United States,” pages D-1805 to D-1857. 
16  The Commission does receive such information on a case-by-case basis if a cable operator appeals a local 
franchise authority’s finding that the operator does not qualify as a small cable operator pursuant to § 76.901(f) of 
the Commission’s rules.  
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
21 
 
therefore we are unable to estimate more accurately the number of cable system operators that would 
qualify as small under this size standard. 
7. Open Video Services.  Open Video Service (OVS) systems provide subscription 
services.17  The open video system framework was established in 1996, and is one of four statutorily 
recognized options for the provision of video programming services by local exchange carriers.18  The 
OVS framework provides opportunities for the distribution of video programming other than through 
cable systems.  Because OVS operators provide subscription services,19 OVS falls within the SBA small 
business size standard covering cable services, which is “Wired Telecommunications Carriers.”20  The 
SBA has developed a small business size standard for this category, which is:  all such firms having 1,500 
or fewer employees.21  To gauge small business prevalence for the OVS service, the Commission relies 
on data currently available from the U.S. Census for the year 2012.  According to that source, there were 
3,117 firms that in 2012 were Wired Telecommunications Carriers.  Of these, 3,059 operated with less 
than 1,000 employees.  Based on this data, the majority of these firms can be considered small.22  In 
addition, we note that the Commission has certified some OVS operators, with some now providing 
service.23  Broadband service providers (“BSPs”) are currently the only significant holders of OVS 
certifications or local OVS franchises.24  The Commission does not have financial or employment 
information regarding the entities authorized to provide OVS, some of which may not yet be operational.  
Thus, at least some of the OVS operators may qualify as small entities. The Commission further notes 
that it has certified approximately 45 OVS operators to serve 116 areas, and some of these are currently 
providing service.25  Affiliates of Residential Communications Network, Inc. (RCN) received approval to 
operate OVS systems in New York City, Boston, Washington, D.C., and other areas.  RCN has sufficient 
revenues to assure that they do not qualify as a small business entity.  Little financial information is 
available for the other entities that are authorized to provide OVS and are not yet operational.  Given that 
some entities authorized to provide OVS service have not yet begun to generate revenues, the 
Commission concludes that up to 44 OVS operators (those remaining) might qualify as small businesses 
that may be affected by the rules and policies adopted herein. 
8. Satellite Master Antenna Television (SMATV) Systems, also known as Private Cable 
Operators (PCOs).  SMATV systems or PCOs are video distribution facilities that use closed 
transmission paths without using any public right-of-way.  They acquire video programming and 
distribute it via terrestrial wiring in urban and suburban multiple dwelling units such as apartments and 
condominiums, and commercial multiple tenant units such as hotels and office buildings.  SMATV 
systems or PCOs are now included in the SBA’s broad economic census category, “Wired 
Telecommunications Carriers,”26 which was developed for small wireline firms.27  Under this category, 
                                                     
17 See 47 U.S.C. § 573. 
18 47 U.S.C. § 571(a)(3)-(4).  See 13th Annual Report, 24 FCC Rcd at 606, para. 135. 
19 See 47 U.S.C. § 573. 
20 U.S. Census Bureau, 2012 NAICS Definitions, 517110 Wired Telecommunications Carriers, 
http://www.census.gov/naics/2012/def/ND517110.HTM#N517110. 
21 13 CFR § 201.121, NAICS code 517110 (2012). 
22 See U.S. Census Bureau, Table EC1251SSSZ5, 
https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t#none. 
23 A list of OVS certifications may be found at http://www.fcc.gov/mb/ovs/csovscer.html. 
24 See 13th Annual Report, 24 FCC Rcd at 606-07 para. 135.  BSPs are newer firms that are building state-of-the-art, 
facilities-based networks to provide video, voice, and data services over a single network.  
25 See http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/current-filings-certification-open-video-systems (current as of July 2012). 
26 See 13 CFR § 121.201, NAICS code 517110 (2012). 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
22 
 
the SBA deems a wireline business to be small if it has 1,500 or fewer employees.28  Census data for 2012 
indicate that in that year there were 3,117 firms operating businesses as wired telecommunications 
carriers.  Of that 3,117, 3,059 operated with 999 or fewer employees.  Based on this data, we estimate that 
a majority of operators of SMATV/PCO companies were small under the applicable SBA size standard.29 
D. Description of Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance 
Requirements 
9. As indicated above, this NPRM addresses ways to modernize certain notice provisions in 
Part 76 of the FCC’s rules governing multichannel video and cable television service.  First, the NPRM 
seeks comment on proposals to modernize the rules in Subpart T of Part 76 (Subpart T),30 which sets forth 
notice requirements applicable to cable operators.  In particular, the NPRM proposes to allow various 
types of written communications from cable operators to subscribers to be delivered electronically, if they 
are sent to a verified e-mail address that includes a mechanism for customers to opt out of e-mail delivery 
and continue to receive paper notices.  The NPRM also seeks comment on whether to allow subscriber 
privacy notifications required pursuant to Section 631 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended 
(the Act), to be delivered electronically to a verified e-mail address, subject to consumer safeguards.  In 
addition, the NPRM proposes to permit cable operators to reply to consumer requests or complaints by e-
mail in certain circumstances.  Second, the NPRM seeks comment on whether and how to update the 
requirement in Sections 76.64 and 76.66 of the Commission’s rules that requires broadcast television 
stations to send carriage election notices via certified mail.  Through this NPRM, the Commission seeks 
to minimize the administrative burden on cable television operators, including smaller cable operators, by 
allowing electronic delivery of certain notices to subscribers, which will reduce the costs and burdens of 
providing such notices.  We anticipate that this will lead to a long-term reduction in reporting, 
recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements on all cable operators, including small entities.   
E. Steps Taken to Minimize Significant Economic Impact on Small Entities and 
Significant Alternatives Considered 
10. The RFA requires an agency to describe any significant alternatives that it has considered 
in reaching its proposed approach, which may include the following four alternatives (among others): “(1) 
the establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account 
the resources available to small entities; (2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of 
compliance and reporting requirements under the rule for such small entities; (3) the use of performance, 
rather than design standards; and (4) an exemption from coverage of the rule, or any part thereof, for 
small entities.”31 
11. The Commission expects to more fully consider the economic impact on small entities 
following its review of comments filed in response to the NPRM and this IRFA.  Generally, the NPRM 
seeks comment on: a proposal to adopt a rule allowing generic written communications from cable 
operators to subscribers required by Subpart T to be delivered to a verified e-mail address with an opt-out 
mechanism enabling customers to continue receiving paper notices; whether to permit cable operators to 
(Continued from previous page)                                                            
27 Although SMATV systems often use DBS video programming as part of their service package to subscribers, they 
are not included in Section 340’s definition of “satellite carrier.”  See 47 U.S.C. §§ 340(i)(1) and 338(k)(3); 17 
U.S.C. §119(d)(6). 
28 13 CFR § 121.201, NAICS code 517110 (2012). 
29 U.S. Census Bureau, Table EC1251SSSZ5, 
https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t#none.  
30 47 CFR §§ 76.1601-76.1630.   
31 5 U.S.C. § 603(c)(1)-(c)(4). 
 Federal Communications Commission FCC-CIRC1712-06  
 
23 
 
provide certain written notices to subscribers by posting the written material on the cable operator’s 
website; whether to adopt a rule specifying that subscriber privacy notifications required pursuant to 
Section 631 of the Communications Act may be delivered via e-mail, subject to consumer safeguards; a 
proposal to allow cable operators to respond to consumer requests or billing dispute complaints by e-mail, 
if the consumer used e-mail to make the request or complaint or if the consumer specifies e-mail as the 
preferred delivery method in the request or complaint; whether to adopt other proposals to update Subpart 
T in light of technological advances and market changes in the cable industry; and whether and how to 
update the requirements that broadcast stations send carriage election notices via certified mail.  The 
Commission’s evaluation of the comments filed on these topics as well as on other questions in the 
NPRM that seek to reduce the burdens placed on small cable operators will shape the final conclusions it 
reaches, the final significant alternatives it considers, and the actions it ultimately takes in this proceeding 
to minimize any significant economic impact that may occur on small entities. 
F. Federal Rules that May Duplicate, Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rule 
12. None.